The Creation of Man and Woman
What appears to have happened in this second chapter of Genesis is a more detailed look at the creation of man. A singling out of the sixth day of Creation – man was clearly God’s priority.
I found this chapter confusing and possibly conflicting with the previous chapter. Chapter two appears to suggest that plant life had not yet been planted before man was created, but if this is now day six then it must have been: ‘when no bush of the field was yet in the land and no small plant of the field had yet sprung up’ [Genesis 2:5]. After finishing Genesis chapter 2 I interpret Genesis 2:5 to mean that plant life has been created but the cultivated crops have not yet grown because man wasn’t there to work the field: ‘there was no man to work the ground’ [Genesis 2:5]. Unless I have missed something in the timeline.
It seems God is giving humanity the best start possible by creating the garden of Eden. In the English Standard Version (ESV) Bible, “garden” has been spelt with a lowercase “g”. I had always assumed that the whole name of the place was Garden of Eden, but it appears to be a garden that sits on the outskirts of a place named Eden: ‘A river flowed out of Eden to water the garden’ [2:10]. Again, perhaps this is an alternate translation and not necessarily accurate.
I have a basic school knowledge of these early events of the Bible, so when God decides to put the tree of the knowledge of good and evil into the middle of the garden I cannot help but feel he is a little naive. I’m not sure why this tree is needed. It seems that when the beasts and birds roam the land before man’s creation the world doesn’t need “good” and “evil”, but once man is created, “good” and “evil” need to exist. I think this is a bit of foreboding and an inevitability.
Man is formed from the dust of the ground and then life is breathed into him by God. Interesting that the man was not living (what was he/it?) until God breathed life into him.
I also can’t quite get my head around that God is supposedly all-knowing (at least this is what I have heard from people who practice religion), and yet I don’t feel he understands quickly enough that it is ‘not good that man should be alone’ [Genesis 2:18]. Then he presents man with a series of animals and birds for man to name: ‘The man gave names to all livestock and to the birds of the heavens and to every beast of the field. But for Adam there was not found a helper fit for him.’ [Genesis 2:20] How did God not realise that Adam might want someone who looks like him, who is of the same “kind”? This is also the first time that Adam is called such. I wonder if when naming all the other creatures Adam also named himself.
When God creates woman he takes a rib from the man and forms woman from the rib. Why not form her from dust as he did with man? This is answered later in the text and is symbolic of the bond between man and woman and husband and wife – still, it feels like a drastic measure!
Something that I enjoyed in this chapter is the description of the river flowing from Eden to the garden and then splitting into four. Of the four named rivers, I have only heard of the Euphrates and the Tigris, not the Gihon or Pishon. I’m not sure what the purpose of this chapter section is. Perhaps to show that the garden is abundant of life (as water is a life giver/bringer), and maybe to show where Eden could have been located. However, since writing this part, I have seen that the Pishon and Gihon rivers do not exist anymore, at least not with the same name. This means no one knows where Eden could be. I also saw a theory about how it is impossible to determine Eden’s location now due to (spoiler alert) God bringing the flood. The flood would have changed the face of the earth, therefore the river locations and Eden would be completely different today. However, since this was written long after the flood and is the “word of God” then you’d think He could have been a little more helpful with directions.
All in all this is a much more interesting chapter to read than the first, it has some flavour with the naming of the rivers and lands such as Cush and Assyria. It also has the origin of man.
You may also like
I am reading the English Standard Version (ESV).
Published by Crossway in Illinois, USA.
This edition printed 2016.
Visually Interesting 
Perhaps no one knows for sure how Eve was made and it was the author’s theory for why men have one less pair of ribs than women? On the other hand, perhaps that IS how Eve was made (and also the reason for women having more ribs).
The name Adam comes from the Hebrew word for Man. So he might not have had a name in the original Hebrew text. Eve comes from the Hebrew word meaning “to breathe” or “to live”.
LikeLike
Thanks for the information on the names: very interesting. It would be nice to be able to read the original languages of the Bible to get as close to the original writings as possible. That is not very possible though!
Men and women actually have the same number of ribs – that is just a myth. Probably perpetuated by the Bible.
LikeLiked by 1 person
wow!! 94Historically, why were people religious? A story from Wells Cathedral
LikeLike